Desperately looking for a silver lining in this shameful disaster, it certainly is providing a useful history lesson.
Kinda like calling parents that are concerned about their children's education domestic terrorist.When college students sat down at segregated lunch counters in 1960, they were breaking the law. They trespassed on private property, refused police orders to disperse, and sometimes violated court injunctions specifically designed to stop their demonstrations. In an effort to maintain public order, local authorities arrested them by the hundreds and charged them with disturbing the peace.
But these students were also exercising their constitutional rights.
This paradox—that civil disobedience can be simultaneously illegal and constitutionally protected—has been a constant source of tension in the U.S. But how the law talks about it has changed. Increasingly, the language of national security is creeping into spaces once governed by public-order statutes and First Amendment doctrine. We are no longer debating whether protesters who break the law should face charges. The new question is whether they should be investigated as terrorists.
What happened in Minneapolis—and what threatens to happen more broadly—reveals how quickly that transformation can occur, and why it should alarm anyone who cares about democratic dissent.
We have been here before, repeatedly. In his comprehensive study “Perilous Times,” legal historian Geoffrey Stone traces a recurring American pattern: Perceived crisis triggers expanded executive power—which gets directed not just at genuine threats but at unpopular dissent—until the crisis passes and retrospective analysis reveals how badly we overreacted.
The Dangerous Drift to Redefine Protest as Terrorism
The line between civil disobedience and terrorism is collapsing. History warns us what comes next.www.lawfaremedia.org
The alarm is especially pertinent given the regime's penchant for authoritarian governance. Something it has made no secret of in threatening to invoke the Sedition Act to stifle political dissent and criticism from American citizens.
The entire article is a worthy read.
Gee, I remember very well when soccer moms were being labelled domestic terrorists for opposing Project 1619 being taught in schools and hassled by the FBI and put on watch lists and no fly lists. But I am sure the faithful neo-leftists, like yourself, have conveniently forgotten that. I remember AOC calling all Trump voters domestic terrorists. I'm pretty sure the non-insane think opposing neo-leftist ideology being taught in school and voting for Trump don't qualify as domestic terrorism, but inhibiting law enforcement from carrying out their duty is. You neo-leftists can try and rewrite history all you want, but there will always be those who know the simple truth and oppose your attempts to rewrite history for your advantage.
Democracy does in darkness, your lies and oddball conspiracy theories are darkness
